The reporting done by Megan Carter in Absence of Malice shows us how the press can damage people’s lives. She comes across ethical problems while trying to report on an exciting story, and she ends up making a few bad decisions that end up hurting the people involved. Her thirst for a juicy story and her emotional ties to her subjects causes problems not only for her, but for them as well. This movie is a good representation of how reporting a story can go wrong, and what journalists should not be doing.
After illegally obtaining information on Michael Gallagher from the Dept. of Justice, Carter writes a story stating that he was a key suspect in the disappearance of Joey Diaz. She makes sure that her reporting is accurate, even though Gallagher may not end up being the perpetrator. Similarly, in the case of Hurst v. Capital Cities Media Inc., a story was written that Hurst was a suspect of a rape case. He sued for false-light invasion of privacy, but lost because the information was accurate at the time even though he didn’t commit the crime. Now in Carter’s case, she may have written a story that was accurate at the time, but she didn’t do a good job of fair reporting. She didn’t initially reveal that she got the information illegally. Today, sources need to be named up front, otherwise a journalist can lose credibility and maybe even their job.
Carter’s methods of reporting were very questionable. She did many things that people would deem unethical or wrong. For instance, when she goes to interview Michael Gallagher on his boat, she wears a wire. Because of the Wiretap Act of 1968, this would have been illegal for her to do in Florida, which is a two-party recording state. She also forms an emotional relationship with the man she wrote about in her story. She gets into a complicated situation where she’s torn between her right to inform the public and her feelings towards Gallagher. She comes across another ethical issue when she wants to clear Gallagher’s name, but also keep Theresa Perrone’s identity a secret. To secure the alibi, she included Parrone’s name, resulting in her suicide.
Although she ended up being in the wrong, Carter always had good intentions. She started out by writing a story to inform the public of an investigation and the suspects involved. The next story was released to make public the alibi of the man she had put into the spotlight. Her final story was meant to reveal corruption that had taken place involving a government official. She was trying to be a good and honest reporter by being accurate, though she did not know if it was truthful.
If I were in Megan Carter’s position, I wouldn’t have looked in the file, but still tried to find evidence to write the initial story. I also would have contacted Gallagher prior to writing to get his opinion on the investigation and use it in the story. The decisions she made weren’t always ethical, but she tried her best to right the wrongs she had made. Carter’s experience helped shape journalism by educating people on what malice is and how reporters should and should not handle a situation like this.
Sources
Absence of Malice
https://storify.com/nicole_kraft/media-law-and-ethics-in-film-comm-3404
http://blogs.baruch.cuny.edu/scandal/2012/12/04/what-a-journalist-should-not-do-watch-movie-absence-of-malice/
Good!